3722 research outputs found
Sort by
Assessment of the Trust Crisis between Upstream and Downstream States of the Helmand River Basin (1973–2022): A Half-Century of Optimism or Cynicism?
No full textBuilding trust is the foundation for reliable and sustainable cooperation between upstream and downstream riparians of a shared watercourse. This research aimed to assess the challenges of trust building between upstream Afghanistan and downstream Iran on the Helmand River. Given the rapid climatic changes and the high demand for water use due to increases in population and agricultural expansion in the basin, this research argues that both nations failed to fully implement the 1973 Helmand River Treaty, which has eroded opportunities to build trust between the two riparians. Also, the paper asserts that by prioritizing national security interests over transboundary interests and by implementing a one-sided data sharing approach in practice, both Iran and Afghanistan created significant challenges for the establishment of trust between them. The paper concludes that to establish a long-lasting trust between the two neighboring states, both countries should hold themselves responsible for and committed to cooperation through a proper data sharing mechanism
What the Heller is Going on With the Second Amendment: Are Licensing Requirements Living up to the Heller Standard?
Get PDFThe full extent and guarantees of the Second Amendment have yet to be understood in light of modern advances in weaponry. Further, there is little Supreme Court precedent to aid in defining the scope of the Second Amendment. With challenges to restrictions on concealed carrying of firearms in public, the Second Amendment requires much clarification. Federal circuit courts are divided on how to apply the Second Amendment to firearm licensing schemes and differ on the interpretation of the Heller decision. This Note provides guidance on understanding the core protection of the Second Amendment and the presumptions left by the Supreme Court’s Heller decision. Additionally, this Note will discuss the traditional understanding of the Second Amendment and whether the scrutiny analysis applies to Second Amendment cases
PDF Killed the Copier Star: Modernizing the Access to Sources of Proof Factor in a 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) Transfer Analysis
Get PDFWith digital solutions to document storage, non-physical sources of evidence will become increasingly relevant for different types of legal actions. For patent proceedings, where evidence is often electronic, the need for a clearly defined approach to analyzing physical and electronic evidence has appeared within the first private factor of a 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) transfer analysis. The evidentiary factor evaluating non-witness evidence—the access to sources of proof factor or first private factor—was interpreted by the Fifth Circuit when faced with weighing electronic evidence in favor, or against, potential transfer venues. Fifth Circuit precedent—relied upon in other circuit court opinions and the standard for when writs of mandamus reach the Federal Circuit—determined the access to proof factor is still relevant to modern transfer analyzes despite the ease of transfer some digital media provide. The convenience of digital evidence has led some district courts to request an amended approach for the first private factor analysis. In order to maintain the relevance of the access to sources of proof factor, the treatment of electronic evidence needs to be updated to reflect the expanding digital landscape. With a tailored approach recognizing the distinctions and ease of transfer for certain types of evidence, the tension between district court holdings, that the Gilbert factor is superfluous, and the circuit courts, holding that the factor is still relevant for transfer analysis, can be resolved. Sources of proof and the mediums they appear on will constantly change, and the law governing discretionary transfers should be prepared to adapt to those changes. This Comment seeks to provide a recommendation on how that can be achieved
The Environmental Democracy That Was, Then Wasn\u27t, but Could Be Again
Get PDFOver the 50 years since former EPA Administrator William D. Ruckelshaus wrote The Citizen and the Environmental Regulatory Process, much has changed. On the one hand, participation in environmental regulatory decisionmaking has flourished, but on the other, Ruckelshaus\u27s prediction of growing consensus around the environmental movement has proven illusory. In this short essay reflecting on participation in environmental regulatory decisionmaking, I highlight what Ruckelshaus was right about and, just as importantly, where his vision of environmental participatory governance might need some updating. Looking back at the dawn of environmental democracy in the regulatory process and comparing it to the present situation, we can learn both how the need for incorporating public preferences in regulatory decision-making endures and how delicate that task can be without public consensus over the best policy course. Fortifying environmental participation for the future may require a very different vision than the one Ruckelshaus relied on to establish the field
Reporte Final del Estudio del Proyecto de Reintegración Mexicana
No full textEl fenómeno de los mexicanos que estan regresando a México después de una estadía prolongada en Estados Unidos es cada vez más importante. Aunque las estimaciones para el período de 2014 a 2019 muestran que más mexicanos han migrado a Estados Unidos de los que se fueron, la migración neta todavía está muy por debajo del pico de migración neta de 1995 a 2000. En el período de 2014-2019, la migración neta de mexicanos a Estados Unidos era de tan solo 160,000 versus 2.3 millones durante el periodo de 1995 a 2000. Entre 2005 y 2014, Estados Unidos experimentó una emigración de ciudadanos mexicanos, ya que más mexicanos salieron de Estados Unidos de los que entraron (migración neta), revirtiendo una tendencia de la década anterior. Muchas de esas personas retorndas fueron deportadas, ya que Estados Unidos aumentó significativamente sus expulsiones al interior del país durante ese período. Estados Unidos deportó a 2,368,098 ciudadanos mexicanos de regreso a México, incluido un récord de 306,870 en 2012. Adicionalmente, un número significativo de personas retornadas se han regresado a México por su cuenta. Algunas de ellas regresaron para reunirse con familiares deportados, mientras que otros regresaron para encontrar mejores oportunidades económicas y educativas que las que estaban disponibles en Estados Unidos.
La capacidad de las personas retornadas y deportadas para reintegrarse exitosamente a la sociedad mexicana depende de una variedad de factores. Como mínimo, una reintegración exitosa significa que una persona retornada es capaz de encontrar un trabajo, obtener vivienda, abordar otras necesidades económicas y cuidar de sus necesidades físicas. Pero una reintegración exitosa también requiere abordar los efectos perjudiciales de la salud mental y emocional que a menudo resultan de un proceso de retorno que, como mínimo, es perturbador y que, para muchas personas retornadas, es muy traumático.
Cuando una persona retornada llega a México, ¿qué factores determinan si experimenta una reintegración exitosa? ¿Qué pueden hacer las organizaciones gubernamentales y no gubernamentales que trabajan con personas retornadas para aumentar las oportunidades de una reintegración exitosa? ¿Qué pueden hacer las propias personas retornadas para ayudar a garantizar una experiencia de reintegración más rápida y exitosa? Algunos factores—como la edad, el sexo o el estatus de deportación—se determinan antes de que la persona retornada comience su viaje a México. Otros factores—como el acceso a redes sociales y empleos, el dominio del idioma y el conocimiento cultural—pueden estar más sujetas a reformas políticas.
Este proyecto de investigación comenzó en 2019 y busca abordar estas preguntas. El equipo de investigación, formado por cuatro academicos juristas, una historiadora y una socióloga, trabajó durante los últimos cuatro años para recopilar datos de entrevistas con personas retornadas, sociedad civil y gobierno. El equipo de investigación contó con el apoyo de un equipo de estudiantes de posgrado y de derecho que participaron en el proceso de entrevistas, la codificación de las entrevistas, la traducción de transcripciones de entrevistas y actas de conferencias, y proporcionaron información legal a través de seminarios web.
A través de este proyecto y su posterior encuentro en la Ciudad de México en mayo de 2023, el equipo de investigación inició una conversación entre personas que han regresado a México, actores gubernamentales, organizaciones de la sociedad civil, abogados y académicos. Los objetivos de la conversación son identificar qué conduce a una reintegración exitosa y qué desafíos existen para la reintegración, recomendar reformas de políticas y desarrollar acciones concretas para abordar las barreras a la reintegración
The incremental development of the ASEAN-China strategic partnership for intellectual property
No full textThis chapter documents the incremental efforts the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and China have undertaken to develop a strategic partnership for intellectual property. It begins by recounting the historical development of the ASEAN–China Free Trade Area. It further examines the Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in the Field of Intellectual Property, which ASEAN and China signed in October 2009. The chapter then discusses the ongoing intellectual property norm-setting activities in Asia, focusing in particular on the development of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, and the Belt and Road Initiative. This chapter concludes by closely exploring the ramifications, benefits, and challenges of maintaining an effective ASEAN–China strategic partnership for intellectual property
A Bibliography of Key Final Agency Determinations of the United States Department of Agriculture Risk Management Agency
Get PDFThis Article is the first law review article to comprehensively examine Final Agency Determinations (FADs) of the United States Department of Agriculture. A key part of the administrative process within the Risk Management Agency of USDA, FADs contribute to the interpretation and understanding of the Common Crop Insurance Policy, which is the federally-reinsured multi-peril insurance contract. This Article surveys ten of the most significant recent FADs and emphasizes the importance of FADs to litigated disputes between insurance providers and insureds with regard to the federal crop insurance program. Overall, understanding of FADs is critical for stakeholders with the multi-peril crop insurance program
If We Build It, Will They Legislate? Empirically Testing the Potential of the Nondelegation Doctrine to Curb Congressional Abdication
Get PDFA widely held view for why the Supreme Court would be right to revive the nondelegation doctrine is that Congress has perverse incentives to abdicate its legislative role and evade accountability through the use of delegations, either expressly delineated or implied through statutory imprecision, and that enforcement of the nondelegation doctrine would correct for those incentives. We call this the Field of Dreams Theory—if we build the nondelegation doctrine, Congress will legislate. Unlike originalist arguments for the revival of the nondelegation doctrine, this theory has widespread appeal and is instrumental to the Court’s project of gaining popular acceptance of a greater judicial role in policing congressional decisions regarding delegation. But is it true?In this article, we comprehensively test the theory at the state level, using two original datasets: one comprising all laws passed by state legislatures and the other comprising all nondelegation decisions in the state Supreme Courts. Using a variety of measures and methods, and in contrast with the one existing study on the subject, we do observe at least some statistically measurable decrease in delegation, if only by certain measures. However, when put in context, these findings are underwhelming compared to the predictions of the Field of Dreams Theory. For instance, we observe that, even where it exists, this effect is substantively small and on par with a number of other factors that influence delegation—our best estimate is that nondelegation cases explain about 1.5 percent of the variation in delegation. Moreover, we also find some evidence that is directly contrary to the Field of Dreams Theory—that is, we find evidence that enforcement of the nondelegation doctrine actually leads to more implied delegation in the form of vague and precatory statutory language. These findings have direct relevance to contemporary debate and cases entertaining a revitalization of the nondelegation doctrine in the federal courts. First, the findings that enforcement of the doctrine can prospectively decrease legislative delegation suggest that there may be something to the Field of Dreams Theory, although that in turn raises the stakes of debates over whether less delegation would actually be good for public welfare. Second, even though there is an effect, the weakness of that effect, both in an absolute sense and relative to other factors, undermines the overblown claims that the nondelegation doctrine could fundamentally transform how government works. And finally, our finding that judicial decisions enforcing the nondelegation doctrine can sometimes lead to more implied delegation through imprecise statutory language suggests that there may be unintended consequences from giving the nondelegation doctrine a new lease on life
Establishing a Conditional Driver Permit in Texas
Get PDFThe article presents supporting data to expand access to state-issued driver permits for Texans who cannot provide the required documents to obtain a driver’s license. Part I examines the unlicensed and uninsured population in Texas that these efforts attempt to address. Part II discusses state jurisdiction to issue driver licenses and permits. It discusses existing Texas statutes that authorize the issuance of driver’s licenses and permits. The section also offers examples of other state statutes that have expanded their right to regulate driving privileges beyond Real ID Act requirements. Part III presents a partial economic analysis illustrating potential economic benefits from passing conditional driver permit legislation in Texas
Discretionary Disfunction and Shivers v. United States: Consequences of Assuming the Intent of Congress
Get PDFThe discretionary function exception is a powerful departure from the Federal Tort Claims Act’s general waiver of sovereign immunity. This exception applies where government employees commit a tort while acting within the discretion of their position. While there has been a lengthy and varying jurisprudential history surrounding the application of the discretionary function exception, neither the Supreme Court nor Congress has addressed whether violations of constitutional rights fall within the scope of a discretionary act.
This lack of clarity proved harmful for individuals like Mackie Shivers in Shivers v. United States because the discretionary function exception swallowed his claim for relief even though his Eighth Amendment rights were violated. This Note analyzes the error of that approach to constitutional claims and the discretionary function exception through the context of the Shivers decision and calls for an amendment to the exception clearly stating that violations of constitutional rights are not discretionary